Posted on 09/02/2021 7:16:46 PM PDT by SteveH
why are so many women evolutionarily inclined to be liberal/socialist/communist/fascist?
my observation is that many more women than men seem to fit these categories, which imho differ only in degree.
my own conjecture:
women have been evolved to submit to the force and power of authority. in prehistory, women, having generally less strength and less weight than men, have taken follower social status as the primary way in which both they and their offspring maximize their survival and reproduction chances.
the us constitution upholds minimal government. minimal government is antithetical to maximum force and maximum power.
thus, the us constitution is often belittled as "unimportant" "irrelevant" "wrong" or "patriarchical" by many women.
many ancient cultures apparently implicitly understood this and thus usually did not give women any chance to assume a position of ruling a group.
one of the few ancient cultures that survives is islam. islam does not seem to offer women any leadership roles or any rights equal to those of males. yet, many women support islam, even while asserting feminist ideology.
the evolutionary attraction of women to force and power is the only explanation that i can come up with that resolves the dichotomy of women supporting a culture which denies womens' rights.
by allowing women equal or better political power, therefore, it could be construed as opening the gates of modern civilization to the islamic, socialist, or communist strains of cultural barbarianism.
i am not certain whether a solution exists, but perhaps someone should find a solution quickly, before modern civilization is overrun.
before the 19th amendment passed, the destructive effect of women on modern civilization was not a significant problem.
what am i missing?
I politely refuse. I think it necessary and even a kindness to induce self-retrospect, in spite of the risk of causing discomfort.
In light of how you reacted to what I said, is this a case of taking one to know one? And that’s without regard to my handle.
“what am i missing?”
I’m talking about market values here, not personal values.
Face it. On average women have skillsets which are more limited than men. They’re better at academic work, but men are passable at it. Men are head and shoulders better at physical labor and task coordination combined with 3-dimensional parametrics. As it happens the male skillset is needed far worse on a practical level to build the engines which support social structure in general. Women gravitate to greater social control in order to place higher value on their skills than a free market offers.
When the SHTF and social order breaks down these truths dominate, and women willingly take back seats.
He’s capable of anything: but first, creation without evolution is the greater feat; and second, evolution was conceived as an attempt to explain creation without God to begin with (the first cause part left unexplained), particularly by encapsulating mankind within it. As an addendum, no evolution means the uniqueness of species remains, in spite of extinction, and this glorifies God further as the designer.
You need to read your Bible some more.
They took a bite of the apple.
Smaller brains.
It’s science.
Don't mind the maggots.
You said “when men quit being
men, women started looking for security elsewhere.”
There is an old adage about women that I think is true, MANY times. A woman marries a man, thinking she can change him. And when she realizes she cannot, she looks for her security elsewhere.
The whole marriage begins in not being honest. And that’s on the woman.
How can the man be blamed when it’s the woman who changed the rules, moved the goalposts and the fact that he’s not willing to be changed into her idea of what she wants him to be means he isn’t being a man.
This is at her feet. It is disgraceful and dishonest to go into something based on wanting change. If you don’t love him for what he IS, not what you want him to BECOME, then don’t marry him. It’s not fair to either one of you.
Woman have a natural need for “safety” and being “protected”.....also for being “secure” in the love of their husbands...... If these are not fulfilled in the home they will indeed seek it in “help” programs and the “social issues/affairs we see so often they support.....If you note many of the issues they are focused on are rooted in fulfilling this natural need.
Let me start by saying I’m a woman....and though I’ve had to live an independent life for many years which required learning to control my emotions in business settings and think rather than react, it was not an easy task but one I would not have survived otherwise.
I learned what I needed to know from men not women. Wise men who taught me what not to do and why. How to handle touchy situations both in business and socially.
However in all this the natural female desire for security, safety and being protected was never fully realized. Nor can it be. A man is wired to act....womans emotions not only get in the way but fears prevent doing so in decisive moments that would never hinder a man.
I do have a question....how many abortions would not be if men didn’t run away from their reponsibility as fathering babies???? or for that matter even bedding woman who end up pregnant.
Great post. I think you nailed it.
I’ll disagree....After I lost my husband in my mid 30’s I had no problem at all with attracting men both younger and older. I had to learn how to handle life outside of marriage and they all offered their advice and help. But I will say with this they ‘respected’ me as a woman. .....they still do.
Because they are all into nurturing, kiss you boo boo, etc. They develop that way because they cannot overpower men.
It’s probably good, but they shouldn’t set policy on tough issues that involve conflict.
as a regular contributor, i formally request that olog-hai be prevented from addressing me any more, if he continues to ignore my repeated polite requests that he do so.
> Females (not all, but a large number) spend their 20s riding the CC.
What is the CC? a muscle motorcycle? tia.
Margret Thatcher was a decisive President Because she knew the value of mens opinions and sought it. Women today try too often to out perform or seduce their way ahead by anything but seeking and being grateful for mens advice.
Also I cannot say enough about a woman greatest need and desire.....to feel ‘secure’ in her husbands love...and that is up to him to give and show. If he conquers that challenge everything else will be fine on the Homefront.
> Women gravitate to greater social control in order to place higher value on their skills than a free market offers.
as in deskbound bureaucrats with a sense of inflated importance and no appreciable real world skills beyond inventing excuses to regulate?
ouch
I’m a conservative woman and I’m mystified by a related question: Why would any man vote for a Democrat? It’s so odd to me why men would so obviously vote against their own interests. Democrats seem to hate men, especially white men. My son says some of his friends vote Dem “because their moms do.” Whatever. . .it’s the SF Bay Area, pretty hopeless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.